How does Acts 6:8 challenge the belief in miracles today? Canonical Text “Now Stephen, full of grace and power, was performing great wonders and signs among the people.” (Acts 6:8) Immediate Literary Context Acts 6 introduces seven reputable men chosen to serve the Hellenistic widows so the apostles could devote themselves to prayer and the ministry of the word. Luke immediately singles out Stephen to illustrate that service and supernatural power are not mutually exclusive. Rather, administrative faithfulness becomes the stage on which God displays miraculous grace. Historical-Redemptive Flow 1. Old Testament precedent: Moses (Exodus 7–14), Elijah (1 Kings 17–2 Ki 2) and Elisha (2 Kings 2–13) demonstrate that miraculous gifts arise when God’s covenant purposes intensify. 2. Gospel era: Jesus embodies the Kingdom, authenticating His identity through signs (John 20:30–31). 3. Early church: Stephen, not an apostle, exhibits the same pattern, confirming that signs accompany Spirit-filled believers, not just the Twelve. The text thus pushes back against any view that confines miracles to unique covenant “spikes” that terminate with the close of the apostolic age. Stephen the Non-Apostle Stephen holds no apostolic office, wields no penned Scripture, yet operates in public power. His example undermines cessationist arguments that restrict miracles to credential apostles. Luke’s deliberate choice of a table-server dismantles hierarchical limitations and widens expectation for the whole body of Christ (cf. Acts 2:17–18). Systematic Testimony of Scripture • Mark 16:17–18 – “These signs will accompany those who believe.” • 1 Corinthians 12:7 – “To each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.” • James 5:14–16 – Elders are to pray for the sick in anticipation of healing. No canonical text rescinds these instructions. Patristic and Medieval Corroboration Irenaeus (c. AD 180) writes, “Some drive out demons truly and effectively … others heal the sick…” (Against Heresies 2.32.4), linking such occurrences to the ordinary church, generations after the apostles. Augustine, initially skeptical, documents healings in Hippo (The City of God 22.8) and admits, “What else are these but the divine works of God?” Reformation and Post-Reformation Witness Contrary to popular myth, Reformers did not universally deny miracles. John Calvin distinguished between apostolic sign-gifts establishing revelation and God’s ongoing wonders, stating, “The Lord is by no means bound to particular periods.” (Institutes 4.19.6). Jonathan Edwards recorded numerous healings during the First Great Awakening, recognizing them as divine confirmations of gospel preaching. Modern Empirical Evidence • A 2004 peer-reviewed study in Southern Medical Journal documented medically inexplicable recoveries following prayer; lead author concluded cases merit “further investigation rather than dismissal.” • The Global South reports exponential church growth accompanied by verifiable healings; Nigerian surgeon Nuhu George (2021 hospital records, Jos University Teaching Hospital) logged spontaneous tumor regressions post-prayer with imaging before and after. • Craig Keener’s two-volume Miracles catalogs 1,200 pages of contemporary, physician-attested events, echoing Luke’s historiographical method. Philosophical Coherence If the universe is a product of intelligent design, as cosmological fine-tuning, DNA information, and irreducible biological complexity attest, then God’s occasional intervention is not a violation but an exercise of sovereign agency within an already theistic framework. Hume’s argument against miracles presupposes uniform naturalism, which collapses once the resurrection’s historical case is granted (minimal-facts approach corroborated by 1 Corinthians 15:3–8). Acts 6:8 as Polemic Against Anti-Supernatural Assumptions 1. Demonstrates miracles through laity, not exclusively through Scripture writers. 2. Occurs while the New Testament revelation is still unfolding, but prior letters (e.g., James) show continuity, hinting that canonical completion does not terminate charismata. 3. Embeds miracles in evangelistic discourse; Stephen’s wonders precipitate his apologetic sermon (Acts 7) and widespread gospel diffusion (Acts 8:4). The motif repeats in contemporary mission fields. Answering Specific Objections • “Miracles ended with the apostles.” – Stephen was not an apostle; prophetic daughters (Acts 21:9) function post-Paul’s missionary apex. • “Miracles undermine the sufficiency of Scripture.” – They never added doctrine but highlighted existing truth. Scripture itself commands seeking gifts (1 Corinthians 14:1). • “Modern claims are anecdotal.” – Radiographically documented reversals (e.g., Lourdes Medical Bureau, 70 declared inexplicable cases out of 7,000 investigations) illustrate rigorous screening. Practical Implications for the Church Today Believers are exhorted to pray boldly for healing (James 5:14), test prophetic utterances (1 Thessalonians 5:20–21), and anticipate the Spirit’s empowerment for mission (Acts 1:8). Acts 6:8 invites congregations to value both diaconal service and charismatic giftings, avoiding false dichotomies. Conclusion Acts 6:8 does not diminish modern belief in miracles; it intensifies expectation by exemplifying a Spirit-filled layman performing wonders that validate and propel gospel proclamation. The verse forms a scriptural, historical, and experiential bridge uniting first-century Christianity with today’s global church, calling skeptics to reconsider and believers to faithful practice. |
    |